Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   An Atheist By Any Other Name . . .
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


(1)
Message 106 of 209 (658313)
04-03-2012 9:35 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by shadow71
04-03-2012 3:26 PM


Re: hedging
No.
I am not trying to convert atheists.
Question: if you know the reasons that you believe in God wouldn't be sufficient to convince anybody else, then why did you allow them to convince you?
What led you to adopt a lower standard of evidence than you believe others hold?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by shadow71, posted 04-03-2012 3:26 PM shadow71 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by shadow71, posted 04-04-2012 10:40 AM crashfrog has not replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


(1)
Message 107 of 209 (658326)
04-04-2012 3:04 AM
Reply to: Message 96 by New Cat's Eye
04-03-2012 2:11 PM


Re: "Positive" Atheism
CS writes:
Not exactly the same way...
Could you be more specific and explicit about how it is different?
CS writes:
.....you know this.
I know you think there is a difference. But even after all these years I am not sure exactly what you think the difference is.
CS writes:
Are you trying to play Gotcha?
It seems to me that you apply a double standard. I'm trying to see why you think there isn't one.
You say that you are not agnostic about evolution, that you take a positive position on this. Fair enough. But if you are not agnostic about evolution how can you then be agnostic about the un-evidenced alternatives to evolution no matter how unfalsifiable they may be?
CS writes:
The real test is to answer this question succinctly: Does god exist?
If you say "No", then your a positive atheist. "I doubt it" or "probably not" would be more agnostic positions. And I don't think saying "No" should imply that you're claiming absolute certainty.
If I asked you if an un-evidenced unfalsifiable alternative to evolution occurred (e.g. our old friend Last Thursdayism) would you succinctly say "No"....?
Or not?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-03-2012 2:11 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-04-2012 10:18 AM Straggler has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 108 of 209 (658327)
04-04-2012 3:17 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by New Cat's Eye
04-03-2012 10:28 AM


Re: "Positive" Atheism
CS writes:
The real test is to answer this question succinctly:
'Does god exist?'
I think there are actually two questions and they give different answers.
'Do you believe in god(s)?'
The answer to that is either yes or no. (The answer 'don't know' means that the you don't believe in god)
The second question 'does god exist?' can factually only be answered with 'I don't know'.
The diference between the two questions explains why Dawkins can be both an atheist and an agnostic and why the leader of the Church of England can be both an agnostic and a theist.
Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-03-2012 10:28 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-04-2012 10:25 AM Tangle has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 109 of 209 (658344)
04-04-2012 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 107 by Straggler
04-04-2012 3:04 AM


Re: "Positive" Atheism
Even if the universe was created last thursday, I would still know about evolution. I'd just be wrong.
Me knowing about evolution doesn't rule out Last Thursdayism, because you can't evidence against it, so I can take a positive position towards evolution while being agnostic to Last Thursdayism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by Straggler, posted 04-04-2012 3:04 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by Straggler, posted 04-04-2012 11:40 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 110 of 209 (658346)
04-04-2012 10:25 AM
Reply to: Message 108 by Tangle
04-04-2012 3:17 AM


Re: "Positive" Atheism
I think there are their are actually two questions and they give different answers.
'Do you believe in god(s)?'
The answer to that is either yes or no. (The answer 'don't know' means that the you don't believe in god)
The second question 'does god exist?' can factually only be answered with 'I don't know'.
The diference between the two questions explains why Dawkins can be both an atheist and an agnostic and why the leader of the Church of England can be both an agnostic and a theist.
Right, but also: Answering the question 'does god exist?' with a "no" could just be you expressing your belief that it does not exist. The questions don't have to be seperate.
The second question 'does god exist?' can factually only be answered with 'I don't know'.
Some here would disagree.
'Do you believe in god(s)?'
The answer to that is either yes or no.
But saying 'no' still leaves the ambiguity to the question of whether or not you believe that they don't exist.
You'd have to add: "Do you believe there isn't a god?"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by Tangle, posted 04-04-2012 3:17 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Tangle, posted 04-04-2012 11:25 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
shadow71
Member (Idle past 2934 days)
Posts: 706
From: Joliet, il, USA
Joined: 08-31-2010


Message 111 of 209 (658349)
04-04-2012 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 106 by crashfrog
04-03-2012 9:35 PM


Re: hedging
crashfrog writes:
Question: if you know the reasons that you believe in God wouldn't be sufficient to convince anybody else, then why did you allow them to convince you?
Your are trying to put words in my mouth. I never said I wouldn't be able to convince anybody else about God, I just said I choose not to be an evangical.
Thats not my personal way of living.
I try to set an example for others who know me, or of me, by leading what I believe to be a Roman Catholic life style.
People, especially some of my clients over the years have asked me about my beliefs in God and I discuss it with them and then recommend that they talk to someone who has more knowledge in the Catholic faith than I do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by crashfrog, posted 04-03-2012 9:35 PM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by Taq, posted 04-04-2012 11:16 AM shadow71 has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 112 of 209 (658353)
04-04-2012 11:14 AM
Reply to: Message 103 by shadow71
04-03-2012 7:48 PM


Re: hedging
Afraid I don't get your meaning. Please enlighten me.
In message 71 you stated the following:
"Yes, it is I the theist, who after study, mediation, introspection and life experiences does come to a belief.
Is that something the atheist cannot accept?"
In return, I asked this question in message 82:
"If someone arrives at the belief that the Hindu pantheon really does exist after a lifetime of study, mediation, introspection, and life experiences would you feel compelled to believe in the Hindu pantheon as well?"
Your answer in message 97 was "No".
So it would seem that a lifetime of study, mediation (meditation?), introspection, and life experiences is not acceptable to you, either.
Not really. Your belief is that there is no supernatural.
No, it isn't. I have yet to see any evidence of the supernatural, but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. I do think that if there is a supernatural realm someone should have found evidence of it by now, but I am not going to dogmatically rule out the possibility that the supernatural does exist.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by shadow71, posted 04-03-2012 7:48 PM shadow71 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by shadow71, posted 04-04-2012 1:43 PM Taq has replied
 Message 127 by nwr, posted 04-04-2012 3:04 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 113 of 209 (658354)
04-04-2012 11:16 AM
Reply to: Message 111 by shadow71
04-04-2012 10:40 AM


Re: hedging
Your are trying to put words in my mouth. I never said I wouldn't be able to convince anybody else about God, I just said I choose not to be an evangical.
You are missing the point. The same sort of claims that you make about God would not convince you that Vishnu exists. We are saying that you have a double standard.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by shadow71, posted 04-04-2012 10:40 AM shadow71 has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 114 of 209 (658356)
04-04-2012 11:25 AM
Reply to: Message 110 by New Cat's Eye
04-04-2012 10:25 AM


Re: "Positive" Atheism
CS writes:
Right, but also: Answering the question 'does god exist?' with a "no" could just be you expressing your belief that it does not exist. The questions don't have to be separate.
Yes I could, but then I would just be offering a statement of belief rather than fact using inexact language.
Some here would disagree.
Yes, but they would then be wrong ;-)
But saying 'no' still leaves the ambiguity to the question of whether or not you believe that they don't exist.
That's why it needs two questions one about the belief and one about the facts. If you can't support a 'Yes' answer to the question 'does god exist?' with proof, you're just wrong.
Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-04-2012 10:25 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-04-2012 11:48 AM Tangle has replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 115 of 209 (658358)
04-04-2012 11:40 AM
Reply to: Message 109 by New Cat's Eye
04-04-2012 10:18 AM


Re: "Positive" Atheism
You started this conversation saying that we know evolution occurred as a result of positive evidence. I agree that we do indeed know this.
But you cannot claim to know that evolution took place whilst professing to be completely ignorant and uncommitted as to whether something other than evolution (e.g. Last Thursdayism) occurred instead.
If you think one occurred you necessarily think the other didn't. This is simply inarguable.
CS writes:
I'd just be wrong.
We all agree that knowledge is imperfect and potentially fallible. Indeed it was you who suggested that this form of "trivial" agnosticism shouldn't stop us claiming knowledge on the basis of positive evidence. Again - I agreed.
Accepting (even tentatively) one position necessary involves rejecting (albeit tentatively) other alternative positions. This is simply inescapable.
Yet you seem unable to accept this undeniable fact.
CS - Did life evolve on Earth?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-04-2012 10:18 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-04-2012 11:51 AM Straggler has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 116 of 209 (658361)
04-04-2012 11:48 AM
Reply to: Message 114 by Tangle
04-04-2012 11:25 AM


Re: "Positive" Atheism
Yes I could, but then I would just be offering a statement of belief rather than fact using inexact language.
Right. But its there none the less:
A: "Does god exist?"
B: "No." (I believe it does not)
It doesn't have to be:
B: "No." (It is a fact that it doesn't.)
But saying 'no' still leaves the ambiguity to the question of whether or not you believe that they don't exist.
That's why it needs two questions one about the belief and one about the facts.
But we don't have to be talking about facts, especially if we're just discussing beliefs. You can reasonably answer "no" to the question "does god exist?" without having to make a statement of fact.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Tangle, posted 04-04-2012 11:25 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by Tangle, posted 04-04-2012 12:28 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 117 of 209 (658363)
04-04-2012 11:51 AM
Reply to: Message 115 by Straggler
04-04-2012 11:40 AM


Re: "Positive" Atheism
But you cannot claim to know that evolution took place whilst professing to be completely ignorant and uncommitted as to whether something other than evolution (e.g. Last Thursdayism) occurred instead.
If you think one occurred you necessarily think the other didn't. This is simply inarguable.
Well I disagree. When I say that I know life evolved, I'm not saying that I know the universe wasn't created last thursday.
Accepting (even tentatively) one position necessary involves rejecting (albeit tentatively) other alternative positions. This is simply inescapable.
Yet you seem unable to accept this undeniable fact.
No, I don't think that accepting one position necessarily involves rejecting an unfalsifyable alternative.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Straggler, posted 04-04-2012 11:40 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by Straggler, posted 04-04-2012 12:00 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 118 of 209 (658365)
04-04-2012 12:00 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by New Cat's Eye
04-04-2012 11:51 AM


Re: "Positive" Atheism
How can life have evolved over millions of years as per the evidence if the universe popped into existence as is less than a week ago?
It's one or the other. Obviously.
CS writes:
No, I don't think that accepting one position necessarily involves rejecting an unfalsifyable alternative.
So you know life evolved but have no idea if it didn't.
Huh?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-04-2012 11:51 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-04-2012 12:09 PM Straggler has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 119 of 209 (658366)
04-04-2012 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by Straggler
04-04-2012 12:00 PM


Re: "Positive" Atheism
How can life have evolved over millions of years as per the evidence if the universe popped into existence as is less than a week ago?
It's one or the other. Obviously.
Right. But even if the universe popped into existence as is less than a week ago, it could still be in a way where I know that life has evolved over millions of years as per the evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Straggler, posted 04-04-2012 12:00 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by Straggler, posted 04-04-2012 12:26 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 120 of 209 (658369)
04-04-2012 12:26 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by New Cat's Eye
04-04-2012 12:09 PM


Re: "Positive" Atheism
You could be wrong in your knowledge. We both agree about this.
What you can't logically do is know that life evolved on Earth whilst also claiming to have no idea if it didn't.
That is the contradiction you find yourself in by relentlessly insisting that unfalsifiable notions cannot be rejected.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-04-2012 12:09 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-04-2012 2:08 PM Straggler has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024